Aizenr
Thank you for your contributions, you seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! If you need help on how to title new articles see the naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. For general questions goto Wikipedia:Help or the FAQ, if you can't find your answer there check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. If you have any more questions after that, feel free to ask me directly on my user talk page.
Additional tips
editHere's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!
- For Wikipedia policies and guidelines see The Five Pillars of Wikipedia and What Wikipedia is not.
- Find everything in the Directory.
- If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
- Introduce yourself at the new user log.
- If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random page button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.
- If you have edits from before creating an account try this.
- To Upload Images with the correct Copyright tags.
- Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~), this will automatically produce your name and the date.
You can find me at my user page or talk page for any questions. Happy editing, and we'll see ya 'round. 
Request for edit summary
editWhen editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.
Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. – Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia's Expert Peer Review process (or lack of such) for Science related articles
editHi - I posted the section with the same name on my talk page. Could you take part in discussion ?
User: Shotwell suggested (on my talk page) "I would endorse a WP:EXPERTADVICE page that outlined the wikipedia policies and goals for researchers in a way that enticed them to edit here in an appropriate fashion. Perhaps a well-maintained list of expert editors with institutional affiliation would facilitate this sort of highly informal review process. I don't think anyone would object to a well-maintained list of highly-qualified researchers with institutional affiliation (but then again, everyone seems to object to something)."
We could start with that if you would agree ... - could you help to push his idea through Wikipedia bureaucracy ? Apovolot (talk) 16:31, 1 November 2008 (UTC)